[DF] Advice for first-time Dungeon Fantasy GM

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by b-dog

Could there be a GURPS series about high fantasy with dwarves and elves and dungeons that is done in a serious manner?

As Kromm's public relations representative, I'm gunna have to advise him to stop using the word "silly" when referencing the DF series. He's not talking about the mood and atmosphere of a DF campaign. He's saying the fact that it is a heavy-magic world rife with classic dungeons (monsters, traps, treasure, etc.) with no explanation for it being so makes it "silly." He's calling any such world "silly."

For example, he's using the word silly to describe a DF campaign based on a world not much unlike Athas of the Dark Sun Campaign Setting. Of course, we can probably all agree that the mood and atmosphere of Dark Sun isn't silly and Kromm's not saying it is. (I'll note the one and only published adventure is set in a desert and there was nothing "silly" about its mood or atmosphere). But, DF, like Dark Sun, is a worked example; DF just doesn't use space in its rules books to include setting information to explain the classic tropes and staples and stereotypes of a campaign setting like Dark Sun (or Ars Magica or Pendragon or Stormbringer) does. So, by default, DF is "silly" in Kromm's words because that sort of stuff shouldn't exist and DF doesn't take the time to rationalize it.

In other words:

Originally Posted by Kromm

[DF] isn't explicitly silly.

[tbone]

Originally Posted by Kromm

murderhobos

I so want that in the Webster's.

[Stripe]

Shoot. I meant to include my own advice before posting.

Since you're an experienced GM, I'll skip basic advice like the first and most important rule of role playing games is to have fun. We know what rule #0 is, too. ;)

I'll also skip warning you not to make every adventure a spotlight for the character that does the highest DPS and can tank the most damage. Of course, you have to keep all players entertained, even the ones who made scholars. DF talks a lot about "niche protection," but it's more than that; it's about giving all the players what they need to have a meaningful, interesting and most importantly fun role playing experience.

First of all, two posters above, Mark and Peter, have excellent DF-centric blogs:

• http://noschoolgrognard.blogspot.com/
• http://dungeonfantastic.blogspot.com/

They dabble in other areas as well, but mainly from what I've read of late, it's primarily DF. T-Bizzle has a good GURPS blog that often broaches DF as well with a link in his sig above this post.


I ran standard fantasy with a character creation point budget of 150 and a disadvantage limit of -75 using only the Basic Set and Magic from 2004 until just very recently and reluctantly making the switch to Dungeon Fantasy.

I'm very glad I did.

Other than the system design aspects such as using templates for character creation and whatnot, there were two major points of adjustment I had to make:

1. High combat skill levels (18-22+);
2. Monster design.

1. PC's can start with combat skills in the 20's. That's not a problem. It's awesome.

It opens up a whole 'nother rules set basic GURPS provides, but is less often used in standard fantasy gaming due to lower skill levels.

Almost every attack made by an experienced player will be deceptive or rapid. Often, both.

Commonly, Knights, Swashbucklers and Barbarians will take an Attack maneuver with the options of rapid strike and deceptive -4 -- for a total -10 to each attack roll -- when they are working with skills of 23 or higher, and if they didn't start with that level of skill, they will very quickly obtain it!

For example, right out of the gate, a Knight can chose DX +3, Broadsword (A) DX+6 [24]-23, then take the Weapon Bond perk (Adventurers, p. 14) for an additional +1 to skill with his chosen weapon.

So, be prepared for that. Monsters with one defense at 12-14 -- good in standard fantasy -- might as well have no defense at all in DF. In short order, they are going to be chewed up and spit out and booed off stage by a PC with skill 21 making deceptive attacks at -8 every turn.

On the flip side, PC's, particularly linebackers like Knights, can start with fantastic defense scores.

Again, I'll use the same Knight. With DX+3 and Shield (E) DX+2 [4]-19 and a DB 2 medium shield, a Knight laughs in the face of a ST 30 ogre with a maul and skill 12-14, common standard fantasy levels of skill. The Knight blocks at 14 and parries (with skill 23) at 18 without retreating. He'll shred the standard fantasy ogre, likely in the first round by lopping off its leg, arm, or even head with an easy targeted attack to the neck location.

High PC skills change many of the concepts of monster design used for standard fantasy. It's something I've greatly enjoyed as a new DF GM. It means you get to design more robust combat encounters.


2. Monsters must be designed to fit their opposition. That doesn't mean they must be designed to be difficult or easy either one; but what you don't want to happen is for a monster that you designed to be a challenge to be a walk in the park, or a monster you designed to be a push-over to put your session on the brink of a TPK.

Let me pull a few examples out of many. By no means is this comprehensive.

• Undead and Demons. You can design undead or demons to be tough cookies, powerful examples of their kind with huge levels of DR, massive damage, and annihilating attack powers. Then, a PC cleric with True Faith (Adventurers, p. 22) and a holy symbol out of a Cracker Jack box comes along and suddenly they are of no threat at all to the party. Watch out for that! Of course, this is no different than in standard fantasy, but it seems to be exaggerated in DF.
  
  
• Monsters that are Homogenous (or Diffuse). Knights, Swashbucklers and sometimes Barbarians are the primary damage dealers of the group and they can often hack through stone golems and giant skeletons no problem. But, they aren't the only damage dealers. Scouts and Wizards can be designed to fill that roll as well. However, they are often much less effective when dealing with monsters with these forms of damage reduction. So, use them wisely or risk frustrating players who chose to do forms of damage other than swing-cutting.
  
  
• Flying monsters with high dodge and decent ranged attack capabilities. These can really chew up even a well-designed PC party accustomed to fighting in 10'x10' rooms with 12' ceilings and one-hex-wide halls. First of all, they often flip the tables that Homogenous monsters set. They can take the primary damage dealers out of the fight while focusing the spotlight on the secondary. Scouts with their bows and arrows and Wizards with their fireballs must deal damage at a range. Trouble is, by default, they can't perform deceptive or rapid strikes and one dodge roll by the monster is all it takes to negate all damage done by the PC party for an entire "round" of combat. Take a decent dodge (not to mention the Aerobatics skill!) and a decent ranged attack like a flame jet, and these otherwise weak enemies can slowly burn a PC party to a crisp without taking a single point of injury.

Here's a good thread about basic PC party composition: [DF 1, 2] Which Four PC Templates?

All that said, as other have noted, Wizards, Druids, Bards and other casters are the most likely to throw a wrench in the gears of your dungeon's design. Again, that's the same as in standard fantasy but it seems to be compounded in DF. Experience and knowledge of the spell list in Magic are required unless you want to constantly hose players who chose to create casters with, "You can't do that!" or, "That spell just doesn't work!" or, "Sorry. No-mana zone." That's not fair to pull very often and it's certainly not fun for the player on the receiving end.

Originally Posted by tbone

I so want that in the Webster's.

I think Peter coined it, didn't he? :)

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by b-dog

It is disappointing to hear DF as a silly genre. I feel it can be silly if you want it to be silly but you can play seriously if you want to.

See my signature.

Originally Posted by b-dog

Could there be a GURPS series about high fantasy with dwarves and elves and dungeons that is done in a serious manner? Maybe GURPS Heroic Fantasy where you could play a wizard who fights monsters and the forces of evil? But done in such a manner that at least attempts to make sense. Maybe something like Ars Magica or Pendragon or Stormbringer?

You're totally right, man. There's this gaping hole in the GURPS line. We really need a book about fantasy games with a deep, rich discussion of what makes fantasy games work, how best to build your own, the themes found therein. Perhaps we could touch on monsters and alternate magics, the cycle of history, and put in some racial and occupational templates so you can hit the ground running, and maybe even have a pre-gen setting or two. Would it be so hard? Not sure what to call it, but I bet we can get Bill Stoddard to write it up. He's pretty good at thoughtful setting material.

[tbone]

Originally Posted by Stripe

I think Doug coined it, didn't he? :)

Ah, I may have missed that. Credit where it belongs.

The term "murderhobo" reminds me wonderfully of early RPGing, when the question of "So where do our D&D characters actually live?" came up in the game, and there was an odd moment when we realized that nobody had any idea...

Originally Posted by Mailanka

Not sure what to call it, but I bet we can get Bill Stoddard to write it up.

Never happen. Pure Fantasy. : )

But on that topic, I hope people wanting "serious" Fantasy don't forget about Banestorm. I always think it's under-appreciated.

Hm, I don't know whether many DF players are clamoring for a ready-made game world to host their dungeons, but it'd be fun to see a simpler "alternate" Yrth (the Banestorm world) readied for DF – a conversion of sorts, with less trade and politics, more weird gods and monsters. Sounds like a nifty Pyramid article to me, if an actual DF line book would be going too far...

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by tbone

Ah, I may have missed that. Credit where it belongs.

Crap! I've been saying Doug when I meant Peter! XD

Apologies to both parties. XP

Gunna have to edit my post!

[Dammann]

I outlined a campaign world when I started my DF campaign, but I sometimes wish I hadn't. I think a lot of fun comes from trying to rationalizing why things are so weird on the fly, and taking some flip remark a player makes about the world and deciding it is true. When a player says, "Owlbear? Those things are like loot piñatas!" I decided that his treasure was literally inside of him. I really like the disconcerted looks when the player realize that they called it.

If I were starting now, I would spend my preparation time on statting challenges, and no time on thinking about the setting, allowing it to emerge on its own. I mean, you need rumors and hooks, I guess, but a list of undefined names and place names is good enough to improve that stuff for me.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Stripe

• Undead and Demons. You can design undead or demons to be tough cookies, powerful examples of their kind with huge levels of DR, massive damage, and annihilating attack powers. Then, a PC cleric with True Faith (Adventurers, p. 22) and a holy symbol out of a Cracker Jack box comes along and suddenly they are of no threat at all to the party. Watch out for that! Of course, this is no different than in standard fantasy, but it seems to be exaggerated in DF.

Just to be pedantic, True Faith with Turning doesn't turn demons, just undead, and those handful of wussy demons in DF9 that have "Affected by True Faith." But by default, you wave your holy symbol and they chop you up - only a few have that feature or have a Dread of holy objects.

Undead, though, yeah, True Faith is a win button, although Doug and I have gone back and forth on some ways of changing that if you want it weaker.

Originally Posted by Stripe

I think Peter coined it, didn't he? :)

Murderhoboes? No, stole that from somewhere else. I do love the term for DF, though.

Originally Posted by Dammann

I outlined a campaign world when I started my DF campaign, but I sometimes wish I hadn't. I think a lot of fun comes from trying to rationalizing why things are so weird on the fly, and taking some flip remark a player makes about the world and deciding it is true. When a player says, "Owlbear? Those things are like loot piñatas!" I decided that his treasure was literally inside of him. I really like the disconcerted looks when the player realize that they called it.

If I were starting now, I would spend my preparation time on statting challenges, and no time on thinking about the setting, allowing it to emerge on its own. I mean, you need rumors and hooks, I guess, but a list of undefined names and place names is good enough to improve that stuff for me.

I found this advice ideal. I literally put down a small play area and then defined the stuff outside it as needed. When we moved to a megadungeon (the original plan, but it took some weeks to get it ready) I did the same. I don't have a world map, I don't have a campaign history except as needed, I don't have much of anything except:

- a big dungeon
- a city
- some rough wildernerness mapped in my head
- places to put side dungeons if I need them

Everything else was defined in play, often by off-hand comments by my players. Nothing as funny as loot pinatas, but the actions of the players defined the setting as much as the setting defined the actions of the players. The more time you spend planning the overarching stuff in the game is time you aren't spending putting monsters in front of treasure and PCs in front of those monsters.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Dungeon Fantasy is not slapstick, and the game you say you want to play feels exactly like the DF game I'm currently playing in. If you read Peter's game reports on his blog, I would be very surprised if you called his play reports "silly."

It'll get funnier, I promise.

Maybe "Dungeonland" funny, but still. ;)

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by Peter V. Dell'Orto

Just to be pedantic . . .

Right. Canonically, there are examples of demons with neither Affected by True Faith as a Feature, nor Dread (Holy Symbols) as a Trait. We've been over it. :D

Originally Posted by Peter V. Dell'Orto

Murderhoboes? No, stole that from somewhere else.

Really? The first time I ever heard the term was in one of your posts, and some others expressed the same. Guess we don't get out from under the GURPS rock very often. XD

Originally Posted by Peter V. Dell'Orto

Nothing as funny as loot pinatas . . .

Funny?! Loot pinatas would be AWESOME!!! XD

I swear to the Old Gods and the New, I will incorporate loot pinatas into a future dungeon as soon as possible.

[Ashtagon]

"murderhobo" is a fairly common terms in D&D-land. I'm not sure of the origin.